My Leica MP and film review

[indergaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After owning the MP for about a year I decided to write some of my experiences with this camera, and with film cameras and the film process as a whole. Check it out: http://indergaard.net/2016/02/26/leica-mp-review/

 

[Doc Henry]

Interesting review Indergaad. Thanks !

Nice color and b&w pictures in yoour review !

 

Yes digit and analog,  two different systems but if you compare edges and lines  per example

of poppies or tulips you'll find a big difference . I posted some flowers picture in our thread "I like film" !

 

I agree with you for the terms "mecanical perfection" (don't forget M7)

Same remark for the choice of films ... faithful colors with nuance in b&w

Finally make also some prints and you also see this difference between the 2 systems I mentioned above

 

Good photos with your MP and please post some pictures in our thread

You are welcome !

 

Best

Henry

[patashnik]

You write that you most probably never is going to sell it, but still: It is up for sale at two sites here in Norway (Link 1, link 2). But I assume that is another one, since you have shot only "30 rolls of film" with it, and bought it "new"?

 

Confused.

[indergaard]

You write that you most probably never is going to sell it, but still: It is up for sale at two sites here in Norway (Link 1, link 2). But I assume that is another one, since you have shot only "30 rolls of film" with it, and bought it "new"?

 

Confused.

Yes, that was a different one that I used the same photos for in the ads. Thanks for reminding me to deactivate the ad, that camera is now sold.

[patashnik]

So you had 2 MP's, sold one (with the pics of the other one), and declared the one that you kept as the camera you would never sell. Makes sense, I guess.

[ShivaYash]

I really want the MP, I had one years ago but it was just too precious to use. Having got it new. But now I have bonded with my M6Ti and serviced it, justifying the MP, even second hand is tricky. I'm shooting more film than I thought. Let's see what eBay throws up. This review is a useful insight but why did you sell it? I too am confused. Furthermore I continued to be confused by my own desire to own the MP once more. Leica's advertising team are just excellent at selling ;-)

[indergaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So you had 2 MP's, sold one (with the pics of the other one), and declared the one that you kept as the camera you would never sell. Makes sense, I guess.

 

No, we had 3. My wife has one, we share our equipment: M240, MP's, Hasselblad 501cm, Canon 5D Mark II with TS-E lenses, and so on and so forth.

Sometimes there are good deals to be found, where buying with the intention to re-sell is a good opportunity to actually make some money from photography. This is what I do when an opportunity like that shows up. Over the years I've gotten to know quite a lot of people that do trade-in, and sales of used and new Leica equipment, so every now and then I stumble across a great deal.

 

And as you probably can see on both those sales services (Finn.no and Foto.no) I have excellent feedback for many sales and trades over the course of 5+ years on both services. I have no negative feedback at all.

 

Anyway, this is totally off-topic in regards to the review. If you want to play private investigator then you're free to do so, but please keep that sort of communication in PM, or create a new thread about it. What I sell or not is none of yours or anyone elses business actually.

[Joshua Lowe]

Great review.  I really liked the pic of the cherry blossoms.  

[earleygallery]

You say using an external meter isn't fun. 

 

I'm not sure it's meant to be fun exactly but understanding how to use your light meter (be it external or built in) is a very important part of photography and using an external meter, especially one which allows you to take reflected and incident readings, is a great way to learn about exposure and the process makes one think about the light. 

 

It's a big mistake to discard it as 'not fun'. 

[Guest]

I agree with Børge that using an external meter is not fun, particularly when the light meter in the MP is so good. But it's just a matter of personal preference. From looking at his pictures one can see that Børge is skilled in using the MP meter. Once one learns how to use the MP meter and use the input to set the aperture and speed according to what one wants the mid-tones (say zone V, if you wish), or the highlights or shadows to look like, one doesn't need an incident reading. You can also substitute for an incident reading by placing your palm in the same light as the subject that your interested and taking a closeup reading of your palm and adding a stop — and then, again, adjusting the setting according to that you want. One doesn't need an external meter for all that, although some people prefer an external meter or a spot meter.

 

Actually, I think that Børge's description in his review on a no stress approach to using the MP meter is very good.

[NB23]

The MP meter is extremely accurate. It's very hard to fault.

[pop]

The MP meter is extremely accurate. It's very hard to fault.

Which is perfectly irrelevant. What's relevant is how the negative is exposed and that depends only partly on the accuracy of the meter. Please stop posting messages which are only meant to detract from the topic and to irritate members.

[indergaard]

Just because I think using an external meter isn't fun doesn't mean that I'm discarding it. I always carry an incident meter with me in case I need it. I also always have the PhotoMeter application available on my iPhone, which also works very well. And if I'm slightly unsure about the exposure, I always just over-expose 1/2 to 1 stop and the result is mostly always great. I guess it depends on what type of photography one does... I rarely need an incident meter, but when I do it's very nice to have one available. Half of the time I don't even use the MP's meter, i use my instincts based on a combination of the sunny 16 rule and my own past experience in the light I'm photographing in.

[NB23]

Which is perfectly irrelevant. What's relevant is how the negative is exposed and that depends only partly on the accuracy of the meter. Please stop posting messages which are only meant to detract from the topic and to irritate members.

What's relevant is that the negative be accurately exposed, thanks to the MPs accurate meter. An inaccurate meter will never lead to an accurately exposed image.

And I agree with the op: using an external meter can be a big distraction.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I am well on topic.

[AAK]

What's relevant is that the negative be accurately exposed, thanks to the MPs accurate meter. An inaccurate meter will never lead to an accurately exposed image.

And I agree with the op: using an external meter can be a big distraction.

 

As far as I'm concerned, I am well on topic.

I use an M-A (which has no meter) and an incident light meter as needed. In my experience, using the incident light meter has made me much more aware of lighting conditions and, at least in daylight, a good judge of light. It may be more of a distraction to use at first than a built-in meter, but the reward is that with practice it becomes second nature to assess the light and select the correct aperture or shutter speed. This is not only quite satisfying to have learned this skill, but very helpful in scenes with large ranges of illumination.

[wattsy]

Use whatever method you prefer - if it works for you it shouldn't matter what anyone else is doing.

[rpavich]

Very enjoyable to read, thanks for posting it.

[honcho]

I use an M-A (which has no meter) and an incident light meter as needed. In my experience, using the incident light meter has made me much more aware of lighting conditions and, at least in daylight, a good judge of light. It may be more of a distraction to use at first than a built-in meter, but the reward is that with practice it becomes second nature to assess the light and select the correct aperture or shutter speed. This is not only quite satisfying to have learned this skill, but very helpful in scenes with large ranges of illumination.

Any camera with a built-in meter is a light meter. The MP is one of the best uncomplicated light meters there is.

 

Whether you prefer hand held or ttl is purely personal and I cannot see why a hand held meter should make anyone 'more aware of lighting conditions'.

[rpavich]

Any camera with a built-in meter is a light meter. The MP is one of the best uncomplicated light meters there is.

 

Whether you prefer hand held or ttl is purely personal and I cannot see why a hand held meter should make anyone 'more aware of lighting conditions'.

 

If I may give this a try, I'll explain. 

There is a profound difference between an incident meter and reflected light meter. If you point your meter at (for example) a light colored car, you get one reading. Then you reframe to include a dark bush...what happens? You get another reading. Has the light changed? No. But now you have two different readings. Which, if either, is correct? Everywhere you point the camera, you get a different exposure value. 

 

that won't happen with an incident meter.  Also, an incident meter spits out a number...an actual value. It's different when you get a number that represents the light conditions...it sticks with you...unlike a couple of up or down arrows. Unless the light really changes drastically, you can relax and forget the in camera meter.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[NB23]

If I may give this a try, I'll explain.

There is a profound difference between an incident meter and reflected light meter. If you point your meter at (for example) a light colored car, you get one reading. Then you reframe to include a dark bush...what happens? You get another reading. Has the light changed? No. But now you have two different readings. Which, if either, is correct? Everywhere you point the camera, you get a different exposure value.

 

that won't happen with an incident meter. Also, an incident meter spits out a number...an actual value. It's different when you get a number that represents the light conditions...it sticks with you...unlike a couple of up or down arrows. Unless the light really changes drastically, you can relax and forget the in camera meter.

This is where the understanding of a reflected metering comes in play.

 

Let's take a scene that requires 5.6@1/125.

 

It will be quite easy to get that reading with a reflected meter, but it will require to move your head and hand and to move your head away from the camera (that's the annoying part, IMO).

 

An incident meter (in-camera) will show slightly different readings depending on where you point it. But an understaning of middle gray and tonal relationships will dictate where to point the camera to take the reading. Or better yet; take the reading dead center and simply choose an according speed value by tipping one extra click. The MP's meter is brilliant because not only is it accurate, it shows the arrow AND the red dot at the same time, which means that you are one Stop within the reading, over or under. This tells you a lot about the scene without moving your head away from the camera.

 

Besides, the camera's meter is NOT a spot meter but anaverage meter, thus it is never more than1/2 to 1 stop different than a reflected reading. And 50% of the time, it's a welcome difference.

 

With both methods, the goal is to reach 5.6@1/125.

 

Now, pinning the ideal exposure value and going creative by over or underexposing the shot would be an error. A beginner one.